Friday, 25 March 2016

Further to the blog post - The Merits and Pitfalls of Engineered Focus in Product Safety Assurance

Many
people in the food and health products industry (professionals and
non-professionals) have been conditioned to think narrowly about product
safety. Only a few are able to escape from the narrowly engineered focus and
think freely? An example of the engineered focus is the usual understanding
about what constitutes a safe food product. Some people may be able to think
beyond the definition of a safe food product as that which is free of
contaminants (biological, chemical, physical and other agents that cause
unhealthy reactions such as allergens, and sensitizing agents). The majority of
people do not think of food safety beyond this scope.

This
could very well be an unproven hypothesis. So, let’s put it to the test.
Responses to this post will prove or disprove the hypothesis. Here is the
challenge: Do you know of anything that is left out in the definition of a
“safe food product” as provided above?

You may read
the comments posted in response to this question on LinkedIn:

In your operation or opinion, which of these ranks the highest as an area needing help from an external party?

As a consumer or user of food, pharmaceuticals, medical devices or cosmetics, how would you rank safety, availability and price in order of importance from left (most important) to right (least important)?